1. Jessie Bullens http://wayfinding.fss.uu.nl The role of landmarks in the development of object location memory

2. - Introduction - Egocentric ‘snapshot’ Local landmark cues Distal landmark cues: allocentric representation Egocentric spatial updating Object Location Memory & Orientation

3. Nardini et al., 2006 - Introduction -

4. - Study 1 - Room cues + - Table cues +-+- Same view Room cues + - Table cues +-+- Diff. view

5. - Results Study 1- Radial error: age effect, children 5 years of age differed from 7 and 10-year-olds Angular error: no age effect > table cues available > room cues available when viewpoint changed

6. Leplow et al., 2003 - Introduction - Kiel Locomotor Maze

7. - Study 2 -

8. - Results Study 2 -

9. - Introduction - Morris Water Maze (Morris, 1991) Location Visibility ++ -+ + - - - platform Hamilton et al., 2008

10. - Study 3 - 1 L 2 L 1 2 L 1 2 Block 1 Block 2 Block 3 Doeller et al., 2008 Bullens et al., submitted

11. - Results Study 3 - children 5 and 7 years of age performed less accurate than adults, but parallel processing of landmark and boundary children: distance > angle adults: angle > distance adults performed better on the boundary-related object, difference between VR and real life?

12. - Conclusion - Children 5 years: do spontaneously use local cues when cues are placed in conflict, but are able to (learn to) process local and distal cues in parallel Children 7 years: ‘transitional phase’ Children 10 years: do spontaneously use distal cues for (re)orientation

13. Questions?